I got a huge kick out of Dick Hyacinth's post on degrees of comic book error--ranging from the obvious (where you can't believe that anyone, much less a comic book writer, would have gotten it wrong) to the obscure (where you probably didn't realize an error existed until you read it on the internet).
Having myself grown up during Marvel's age of the no-prize, I am not all that troubled by most comic book errors (I tend to mentally correct them), but this interests me. It's part of the appeal of episodic fiction, that there exists such a wealth of obscurity that it's hard to keep track of. Like anyone else I have a point where error interferes with my enjoyment of a book, but on the whole I'm fairly easy to please.
But you know, I have to admit that, when I started reading DC a few years back, I found it kind of irritating that all of the bits of DC lore I had learned as a child (I was never a regular DC fan but I did read them occasionally) were no longer valid; this had not been such a problem with my one DC title (Legion of Superheroes back when Crisis happened--Supergirl was only an occasional character there, and the rest of the LSH didn't really change all that much) but it kind of felt like I had studied for the test and then had the text changed on me.
No comments:
Post a Comment